General market thoughts

I haven’t been writing too much lately. Lately I have been reading annual reports and 10-Ks as this is the season where such reports get released.

I’ll throw in a few observations, in no particular order.

1. I initiated a position in a small-to-mid-cap (let’s vaguely define this as the $0.5 to $5.0 billion range) biotechnology company (USA-domiciled) that has reasonably good prospects for commercialization of their lead product with sales to commence within the next 18 months. Reading the results from the clinical trials that have been conducted, especially with respect to the competitive landscape for what it is that this company is trying to address, I suspect there is a serious under-valuation in the stock price. What remains is execution – and indeed, “execution” is what happens to investors of these types of companies when their lead products have setbacks with the FDA. However, their balance sheet is well-capitalized with a healthy 9-digit sum of cash for commercialization expenses and my inner sense suggests that it should be a 5-10 bagger over the next three years.

I don’t talk very often about the bio/pharmaceutical sector, but I do have the capacity of understanding what is necessary to invest in such types of companies. It is a very slow moving sector with its own set of economics. The last companies that I had net positive positions in were Gilead Sciences (back in 2002!) when it was apparent to me that their HIV medication (Tenofovir) was top-notch and a game changer – and also Oynx Pharmaceuticals, which had a drug that was somewhat effective in cancer treatments (Sorafenib), but I was much more tepid with. I generally have not been engaged in the sector as much over the past decade since the financial crisis but the aforementioned target of opportunity was too much to pass up.

2. Did you invest in Atlantic Power? Don’t tell me I didn’t give you, the readers, fair warning. Although their stock at US$2.83/share is not nearly as attractive as it was at US$2.20, there is still upside here. High volume on (relative) price highs suggests there’s interest out there. Again, crappy industry, but well run company. The preferred shares are also still quite attractive – in a takeover scenario, what yields 825bps today will be 625bps post-merger.

3. I learn a lot about how millennial retail investors think when reading the Reddit Canadian Investor thread. In particular, we have religious conviction in the infallibility of exchange traded fund investing, coupled with the infallibility of dividend investing, coupled with a gambling-like desire to get better returns than one would expect from a low cost index ETF. Very little have I read much about the analysis of businesses and financial statements, which isn’t surprising. But one example today is what happened to Enbridge after they announced that Line 3 will be completed a year later than expected – the stock tanked 6% today. Some people said this was a buying opportunity because of Enbridge’s relatively high yield (at $2.95/share, it means a 6.3% yield at present, not including future dividend increases). What such retail investors do not consider is the very real threat of a catastrophe killing the business – specifically an oil spill on Line 5 in Lake Michigan, or a financial catastrophe as they have a gigantic amount of debt on the balance sheet which can only be paid with after-tax cash flows (a large part currently is going out the window in dividend payments). The illusion of safety in a large business paying out large amounts of dividends is quite high.

4. My small bet in late December on Canadian interest rates rising will fizzle out for a mild loss. I no longer expect the Bank of Canada to do anything on interest rates when they announce it on Wednesday morning. The central banks now are clearly too scared to do anything – raising rates will cause all of the embedded leverage in the economy to compress which will cause a recession, while lowering rates is an admission that conditions are weaker than they originally suspected and it would be an embarrassing about-face from 2018’s strategy. There is still a stealth interest rate increase going on in the form of quantitative tightening (link) but how much longer will this last? If the S&P 500, however, still stays at the present level and doesn’t exhibit much in the way of volatility that things did in the last two months of 2018, nothing will happen on the short term rate front.

Still, however, 5-year Canadian rates are 1.8% and the yield curve is extremely flat. This generally does not bode well for the economy as a whole.

5. I also took another equity position in what I would call a “very old friend” – a company I’ve been tracking for over a decade and similar to Atlantic Power, has been much-neglected and generally regarded as trash – anybody sane would have exited the company years ago. It is getting to the point, however, where it will become once again recognized by the financial market as having substance and cash flow generation capability. In a good scenario, it is trading at approximately 1 times EBITDA. Yes, 1 times. Should I call that “1 time EBITDA” instead?

The stock, sadly, is illiquid to the point where I have to be really diligent in performing trades to accumulate. I could probably move the stock 10% in a second by placing a market order. My original plan was to sit silently on the bid and nibble, but there has not been a heck of a lot of activity that hits the bids. Even then, the high-frequency traders decide to snipe me by a nanopenny and it is quite frustrating to see those trades go by. So this is a rare case where I had to pound the ask on a few occasions to assemble a reasonable position. If it trades lower I’m interested in accumulating more, but considering it’s now nearly 10% above my acquisition price I have to wait for the market to calm down further before placing further bids above my average price.

The observation here is that stocks that you’ve done some heavy due diligence on last year, five years ago, ten years ago, and even further, you still have knowledge that is better than most of the casual trading that is done in the market – keep those stocks on your watchlist even if you don’t find anything compelling today – it may be tomorrow.

6. The Canadian oil sector is still in very rough shape. Timing the comeback will result in very handsome returns, but presently, it isn’t happening. Gas entities (e.g. Birchcliff, Peyto) are somewhat more attractive, but there is also a supply glut happening that isn’t alleviating itself anytime soon. As such, fixed income is still the way to go if one has to play the fossil fuel sector, at least in Canada. There was an opening here in late December of last year, but that has mostly closed up in my opinion.

7. Alberta is going to go through an election in the next three months. Despite the fact that Jason Kenney will have a better than 90% chance of being Premier after the election, his ability to attract capital back into the Alberta oil/gas industry will be severely limited by market pricing and the federal government. There will be some other items which are investment-worthy that he will have the capacity of affecting, so investors should heed caution to Alberta-concentrated assets at this particular juncture.

8. The net of above is while I still have a healthy cash position (roughly a quarter as of this writing), I did manage to find some capital to deploy. That said, both the S&P 500 and TSX are up about 12% from the beginning of the year and I’m underperforming! Panic!

Actually, what this means is likely an illusion of safety in the broad marketplace. I’d be cautious at this point since the December dump – most of the recovery is done.

Some utility companies are not so safe

I’ve been following the PG&E (NYSE: PCG) story rather closely.

I don’t know anybody that would actually want to operate a utility in California with the state’s liability regime (you are completely liable for damages as a result of wildfires) and this is a pretty clear example of avoiding an investment that will have a good blow-up disaster potential.

Most publicly traded utility companies trade as if they are stable and boring, but in reality, there are quite a few that have embedded hidden risks – beyond their insurance regimes.

The more interesting part of this story is that even after the initial wildfires to cause the slide in the stock, an investor still had plenty of time to bail out before PCG was finished.

But now they’re into Chapter 11, primarily to shed liabilities associated with the California wildfires.

Financially, PCG has US$20 billion in equity on the balance sheet, which works out to about $38/share. They accrued $2.8 billion in wildfire-related claims in liabilities, but estimates are that there will be about $22 billion coming in, which would nearly wipe out the equity in the company.

The unsecured debt is trading at around 80 cents on the dollar presently, but one could make quite a bit of money on the equity if your loss projections on claims were less than what the market is projecting at the moment.

I’m not the type of person to be playing such types of financial games as there are typically far more smarter people than I am (to determine the residual value of PG&E after claims), but I still find it interesting to see how it will resolve nonetheless.

One thing is for certain – people still need to be supplied electricity, and electricity is a very inelastic commodity. When you have so much state regulation in place, especially when hearing about multi-billion dollar capital and maintenance expenditure proposals to prevent future wildfires across huge amounts of power lines, it all serves to have one effect – raising the cost of electricity for captive customers. California residents (e.g. Los Angeles) already pay very high rates for power – and after this debacle on PG&E, they’ll be paying more after these claims are settled. The money has to come from somewhere.

Think a moment about your investments in well-known utility companies such as Emera (TSX: EMA) or Fortis (TSX: FTS) or Hydro One (TSX: H) for a moment. Is there more risk than you originally anticipated?

IFRS 16 – large change in lease accounting

I talk much more about finance than accounting on this website, although I am a professional accountant. A good analogy is math and physics – people in both fields tend to understand the other, more so than the difference between chemistry and biology.

Effective this year, companies will have to adopt IFRS 16, which governs accounting for leases.

Other than enriching accounting consultants that will have to dig into the structures of leases of various firms, this will have a material impact of the reported assets and liabilities on a company’s balance sheet. New students of accounting will also have one more layer of complexity to memorize at exam time, while textbook manufacturers will undoubtedly be happy.

Specifically, the distinction between an operating lease vs. a capital/finance lease is removed and instead all leases will have an asset and liability component. The asset of the lease (the item which you are buying the rights to use) will be depreciated over time, coupled with an interest expense component for the financing cost of the lease, with a depreciation charge to reduce the asset value.

From an investment perspective this changes the character of “EBITDA”, where companies that heavily use operating leases would previously have expensed such costs (typically in operating expenses), while after IFRS 16 is implemented, they will suddenly find their EBITDAs increase because the lease cost will have strictly an interest and depreciation component. They are still expenses, but the characterization of the expense is now changed. This will be an accounting windfall for companies that traditionally are valued on EBITDA metrics.

So if you find it annoying how companies use EBITDA as a proxy of profitability (which it could be given the right assumptions – but most companies abuse the EBITDA number to inflate the perception of their profitability), after IFRS 16, good luck! Just remember, you can only live on after-tax cash flows and not EBITDA!

The other strange implication of the rule is that once a lease is initiated, it will initially be more expensive at the beginning of the lease, and less expensive later in the lease as the embedded interest expense of the lease declines. So let’s say you lease a million dollar jet for 10 years, your expense profile, depending on your cost of capital component, on year 1 would be $125,000 while on year 10 would be $75,000 even if you fork out $100,000/year to use it. Investors have to add one more layer of effort to separate what is happening on the income statement with what is happening on the cash side of things. (Even this example is not quite correct – the lease asset may be $1 million, but the liability is going to be bigger since nobody will want to lease a $1 million jet for a $1 million stream of cash).

You have to love these accounting standards that make life even more complicated for the layman in the name of increasing accuracy. Currently, an investor could look at the notes on the financial statements to understand what a company’s future lease commitments were. One-shoe-fits-all accounting sounds great in principle but it has the consequence of making financial statements more difficult to read and understand between companies even though the goal is to make them directly comparable.

Markets chasing yield again

Life looks rosy again in the financial markets!

So going from the “the world is about to end” mantra in December, we’re back once again to sunny skies.

In particular, interest rate futures are projecting a rate cut later this year, which is a complete turnaround to events just three months ago.

So as a result, almost anything with a yield has been bidded up since the beginning of the calendar year.

It’s as if everything that has been thrown away in the previous rising rate environment is now back in vogue again. It’s like the proverbial crowd rushing out of the exits in December, only to rush back in January?

Very fascinating.